Why 'Passive Income' Is A Dangerous Fantasy (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/06/24/the-top-4-reasons-why-passive-income-is-a-dangerous-fantasy/ <comment><USER2> > This is the basic mistake they've made: they've fallen prey to the belief > that money and meaning are two totally separate things.

Ah, what a terrible mistake to make! To think that one could derive meaning from one's life independently of wealth accumulation! What a ridiculous concept!

EDIT:

Here's another theory: what if the reason these people are miserable is because they made the "basic mistake" of assuming money would bring them meaning and/or happiness? They believed wealth would be an end-in-itself, and upon reaching that holy grail of financial security, they were struck with the terrible realization that there was no instant nirvana waiting for them. And now, having achieved the goal they were supposed to achieve, they're left wondering just what it is they're supposed to do now.

In other words, the problem wasn't believing money and meaning were separate. The problem was believing that they were innately connected.

<comment><USER3> Whenever people start acting all pomped up and talking about how the market chooses as though somehow a fiat zero-sum game is rational indicator I have to ask:

What percentage of the worlds GDP is founded in open source technology? How many people working for peanuts in their basements wrote code that changed the world for nothing? It's like economists don't understand that there are people who can create utility at an exponential, amplified, perfectly scaling rate and their only limit is their self-determination and the empowerment of their chosen language. And they work on their own time. What happens when programmers start _truly_ proselytizing the power of digital creation to the horde of consumers?

Considering the lacking macro facilities in algol-syntax derivatives it's important to understand that programmers are not any more rational than economists. Complexity has gone from being a price of performance to being the crux of a fallen generation, of individuals unable to shower themselves of their neighborly turing tarpits.

I guess at this point what I am trying to say is that there are new fundamentals for the tech economy that are simply unknown. They aren't variables, they are completely off the board. I mean we use emacs/vim, pretend that virtualization can count as security and seem utterly choked in our own miasma of complexity. Integrating old ideas with new is not a matter of mixing software like a chemical mixture but a dick sizing competition without a ruler.

We are mechanics who barely understand our own tools and more than that are philosophically against questioning the separation between programming language/user. It is this behavior that puts more fear in me than what the government does or what tragedies may occur... because it is a sign that our communal process, despite making progress, is a frictional force that doesn't abide by logic.

I know most people are going to latch on to stereotypes or how the models used by an editor/os are still useful... but that isn't the point. The point is that the dynamics and decisions we see reflected everywhere are issues of personalities and groups, and thus the source and solution is via communal interaction. The solution is of course deeply unsettling but luckily novelized throughout our televisors in the form of AI systems that are doing there best to hide their HAL face.

When google shows you custom results, what are they doing? They are acting as a moderator or parent would. But it has always been seen under the guise of the friendly mentor. What happens when our mentors start making suggestions? Do you think that same data could be used to find the most efficient manner to shift your opinion? How deeply does the ranking of links affect your judgement about a subject? Are these new questions to you, or have you simply been holding your hands over your ears?

This isn't about google being malicious, or about another entity forcing their hand. The point is much more unsettling... that there are incredibly important and influential decisions being made not by individuals or beliefs, but by circumstance and yet they remain unquestioned despite their significant social and economic impact. I am supposed to be afraid of the NSA or some entity but what I truly fear is how blinded we all our own confidence with predicting the next day of this collective delusion.

I do not fear the man in Washington, the man in the Vatican or the man in Moscow. Instead I fear our inability to hold ourselves accountable as individuals and as a community to taking the stance for quantifying decisions based on potential impact and not limiting the debate to mob rule or to hand picked numbers. It is only through the somehow supply/demand immunized Moore's law will humanity be given its mirror, and that truly is an act of a fearful god if there ever was one.

<comment><USER2> This is actually a pretty interesting post, though I'm a bit confused as to how it relates to my earlier comments.

I may add more later, but for now I will just say: welcome to the singularity.

Also: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Shock](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Shock)

<comment><USER4> The documentary on youtube, narrated by none other than Orson Welles, is awesome too: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ghzomm15yE](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ghzomm15yE)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> k-mcgrady I couldn't even finish reading this it was such BS.

1\. An ebook is a shitty source of passive income. People buy it once and there will be a limited market for it, specifically if you are targeting a niche. Anyone who thinks an ebook is the path to financial freedom is an idiot. You need to find a market you can serve where people pay monthly or have to order your product regularly (something that runs out/gets used up).

2\. If you're aiming for passive income why are you building a team?? When you need something done you hire a freelancer for a few weeks, solve the problem and move on. If you require a team and 'great talent' you're running a startup, not a passive income business.

3\. Your customers won't leave if they realise you aren't spending all your time on the business. This doesn't mean you don't care about them. Of course you do. Without them you would be working 9-5. If you have a superior product they will stay with you. Your customers only care that you have a good product and are there to help when they need you. How much free time you have is your own business.

4\. You can stay ahead of the competition. People who run these types of businesses don't spend all day doing nothing. With the business generating income passively you have more time to research how to stay ahead of the competition. If someone is coming out with a better product you can spend 100% of your time improving yours and once you're competitive advantage is maintained, go back to living your live.

<comment><USER5> The best passive income are some good equity/income Investment trusts.

Just before Christmas a checked one of my Investment accounts and found that I had an extra £1500 in dividend income that I hadn't realised I had.

And in the UK maxing out your share save (share options) should your company offer it is a no brainer - the one that is just due to end at BT is returning over 50K (tax free) on an investment (over 5 years of 8k)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> One of the reasons is that people don't know what to do with themselves after they make passive income? Therefore you shouldn't aspire to make passive income? LOL.

Passive incomes means financial independence and freedom to make life decisions independent of monetary compensation. Financial freedom means having leverage in the business of life. That's hugely valuable and worth aggressively pursuing in my opinion. You can always find and pursue your passions after that.

<comment><USER7> Sounds like people are scared of _passive income_ in the same way that they're scared of _immortality._ Lacking imagination, they cry, "but wouldn't you get _bored_?"

<comment><USER8> Who would get bored with immortality? There are so many things to learn, and even more to discover! It would be amazing.

<comment><USER9> You should read _Gulliver 's Travels_.

<comment><USER8> I half-read it a while ago, what are you referring to?

<comment><USER9> Well, to the Struldbrugs, the immortals of Luggnagg.

<comment><USER8> Ah, I will read that again, I have no recollection. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> #4 particularly stands out to me. I always feel sorry for people who make statements like, "my work isn't my life" or "I work to live, I don't live to work". Considering how much of your life you dedicate towards working, why the hell aren't you making damn well sure it's doing something that gives you at least a sense of fulfillment, if not outright joy. Even passive income takes a good deal of effort and time to generate, albeit with the goal of minimizing the continual work. Also worth considering is that, in the slim number of ventures that will generate sustainable passive income, and even smaller number of them will be something that generates that income for the rest of your adult life. So the likelihood is, even if some app you wrote is passively making you 5 figures now, in a few years it's quite likely it won't be, particularly if you're neglecting it. So you will likely work again. And if your mindset is always that _all work is bad_ , how are you ever going to find real meaning for how you've spent your life?

<comment><USER11> > Considering how much of your life you dedicate towards working, why the hell > aren't you making damn well sure it's doing something that gives you at > least a sense of fulfillment, if not outright joy.

Yeah. That's what "The Man" wants you to believe in.

Back in the day, people used to be largely self-sufficient, filling their time with tasks for themselves (farming, weaving, building things), profiting by selling the surplus or charging to do something they were good at, and using the money to buy the things they needed.

As you know, industrial revolution and large scale monoculture changed that. People would sweat all day, and because there was no time (or energy) left for anything else, they couldn't build anything for themselves, making employees heavily dependent on their jobs. That power player had two important effects: because the employer has the upper hand, it can command lower wages; in turn, those lower wages drive credit, creating an entire economy based on debt, which reinforces the importance of securing a job, again driving wages lower, in a feedback loop.

So, why that "find a job that you love" is utter bullshit then? Because, ultimately, every job is bad. Every job is an asymmetric negotiation where the employee exchanges his lifetime to a monetary reward that is, _guaranteed_ , smaller than the value he adds. Not to say that it isn't _useful_ , but is certainly a sub-optimal way of using oneself's limited time on earth.

"Passive income" strategy is the exact opposite of that, since the rewards are not bound to how much you can charge your hour, and more to how valuable your work is. Historically, that's how writers, artists, inventors and such have made money. Nowadays, though, the potential is enormous given the cost of automation and reproduction of creative work is ever decreasing.

If you stop and think, this is _mind-blowing_. Of course, Forbes doesn't want you to realize that.

<comment><USER12> While I agree with your general sentiment, I think you need to check your historical facts.

Up to the industrial revolution the vast majority of the workforce was in agriculture, namely either in serfdom or working somebody else's land for a pittance. Not many were really self sufficient.

Secondly, artists, scholars, inventors where either nobles, priests or depending on the local court for their income.

<comment><USER13> > _Up to the industrial revolution the vast majority of the workforce was in > agriculture, namely either in serfdom or working somebody else 's land for a > pittance. Not many were really self sufficient._

Depends on the country -- not all places had feudalism. In freer places, people were self sufficient for millenia.

Heck, people were self succicient even in the US mainland in the 17th-18th century, and that was far from any "industrial" landscape.

<comment><USER12> You don't really need to have feudalism to have servitude, if you're working somebody else's land and you're allowed to keep just barely enough to eat, that'll basically turn you into a serf (and it's still the case in many places around the word, seasonal tomato pickers in Italy is one I know of).

On the other hand you are right that in the colonies the situation was somewhat freer — at first -, that's how they got people to move from the old world, but I'm pretty sure that the situation got back to inequality pretty quickly.

The point I'm trying to make is that this Arcadian paradise that conservatives like to call 'back in the day' is really more of a myth.

<comment><USER13> > _The point I 'm trying to make is that this Arcadian paradise that > conservatives like to call 'back in the day' is really more of a myth._

In some parts of the world yes. In others no.

But not for the reasons the progressives put forward (toil, lack of progress, etc). For political reasons: people being in command of other people.

There were villages and regions all over Europe that such was not the case, and people were free. Sure, you had to work, but that's just as it is now (minus the modern conveniences).

Actually, even in medieval Europe, agrarian societes had so many festivity days that almost half the year was off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just as I'm hesitant to take advice from a personal trainer who has never worked out, I'm hesitant to take advice on starting a business from a guy who has never started a business.

While I agree that info products and affiliate marketing are not the passive cash cows that a lot of people are being tricked into believing they are, those are not the only forms of passive income.

In addition, it's completely possible to enjoy the passive business you've created while at the same time enjoying stuff that brings you no monetary value. I personally enjoy snowboarding, track racing, rock climbing, and power lifting, but I don't have any desire to try to turn them into income generating activities. It's like the author is completely unaware that there are other things to do with your non-work time than partying on a beach. I find my most fulfilling moments when setting and accomplishing goals in activities that give no other reward than the meaning and gravity I have given it.

This whole article reads more like SEM/lead-gen for his book. I read it a bit over a year ago and found it disappointing.

</comment><comment><USER15> Oh Forbes, you pay writers like this guy to come up with some discomforting topics along a text broken into X number of pages on purpose to force readers to reload all those ads each time. That looks like a form of "passive income" to me.

</comment><comment><USER16> I don't disagree absolutely with what this post is saying, but as someone who has run multiple successful ventures that I'd consider "passive" income, I have to say its not a fantasy. But maybe my concept of "passive" is different from yours. Here we go.

My first passive income business was in high school. I sold video game cheats I made through the internet. I made around $400 a month (a fortune for a high schooler). I considered it "passive." Sure, I'd make some cheats per month, but not because I had to, but because I wanted to. It took me maybe a handful of hours per week to do this. No support.

My next passive income venture was in college. I built a service for students that I scaled up to almost $100,000 a year. I would work on this around 8 hours _every 3 months_. I considered that passive. I also had a full time job. So I was basically raking it in. PayPal transfers every night, a few thousand would show up per week. Passive.

My current passive income venture is a SaaS. It almost pays my rent every month. It takes up about 1 hour a month of my time for support.

At the same time, I'm starting a real, very not passive company that is unrelated to anything above.

So each and every passive income venture shared the following traits for me:

* I built it to solve my own problem, then charged for it because I figured other people would have that problem as well.

* I didn't expect to get "rich" from it, but if the income to hours spent ratio breaks down well, I'm happy. i.e. I'm paying rent on an hour or two of work a month right now. That is pretty good.

* I never had a "team" of more than 2 people. This was not a _business_. It is just a thing that makes money. Legally it is a business, it is taxed like a business, but from a managerial perspective, it just runs itself. The "employees" (all two of them) run themselves.

* When I felt like I didn't need it anymore, I let it go. So far, I'm 2/2 at selling my ventures. The first I sold for a few thousand dollars, the second I sold for much much more. The third I have no intention or plans on selling, but if I feel like I'm not giving it the time it deserves, maybe I will (but don't plan to anytime soon). And if I don't sell it? I'll keep running it, because it is easy.

* During all my passive income ventures, I've had a real job. I think passive income works best when supplementing your natural income. I've had steady passive income for the past 8 years of my life. This can really change your quality of life or your ability to save for retirement or that "next big thing" (car, house, etc.).

My point is: Don't try to build a life on passive income. Just let it happen if its going to happen. You can't force it. You shouldn't force it.

Just do what you like to do. And if you make money doing it, that is pretty darn cool. But if not, you're still doing what you like to do, so smile.

<comment><USER17> This is a fascinating comment, but one bit leaves me confused: How come you still have to pay rent?

<comment><USER16> I'm not sure I understand this question?

If you're asking why I don't own a house, its because I'm not quite ready to make that commitment at this point in my life. :) I'm happy with the flexibility of paying rent, and I pay a REALLY low amount of rent (by San Francisco standards) in a nice place. I'm content.

<comment><USER18> Obviously much depends on your exact financial position and the state of the real estate market, but you don't have to live where you buy forever. It can be advantageous to get into the market and rent out your property if you get bored, leveraging your tenants rental payments.

<comment><USER19> It can be extraordinarily disadvantageous too. Property prices are still extremely high and it's not clear whether this is sustainable over the long- run. Buying or selling a house (at least where I have experience) is a slow, expensive, and fragile process; there are significant costs for both parties.

Renting out a property isn't fun either. Finding suitable tenants and dealing with repairs and other silliness, or paying a property management company that's often despised by tenants, isn't necessarily trivial. Rents might not cover mortgage payments in certain economic periods, especially when factoring in additional expenses. The time that's spent dealing with this headache could be better used doing something else.

Lastly, certain types of mortgages might prohibit renting, and I've seen people caught with their pants down over this.

Owning a place is a burden. It can make financial sense to do so in some situations but I'd be reluctant to buy unless I truly felt I was going to remain in one location for a long (>10 years) period of time. I certainly wouldn't feel like I could just rent it out if I wanted to hop, skip, and jump to a new location after a year or two, or less.

Of course, all my experience is based on buying and renting in the UK. It might be different wherever you are.

<comment><USER18> It is different in Australia though it's not an especially liquid asset anywhere. Market has flattened, but it's still strong. Prices tend to double every ten years but moved more quickly recently. Haven't heard of anyone not able to rent their property out. Most people who can afford to will buy property. There is no expectation that rent will cover a mortgage - you pay the shortfall and it's still a deal worth considering.

<comment><USER19> The difference between the UK and Australia is Australia has tight controls on foreign property ownership, and it can be quite a hassle to buy if you're not a long-term visa holder or citizen. Long-term visa holders also have to sell the property at the end of their stay.[0] Australia also has a decent number of moderate-stay (<=12 months) temporary residents (working holiday, etc) that aren't allowed to buy under FIRB guidelines, or don't have the fiscal means, both of which increase demand for rentals.

I strongly doubt whether the increasing price of housing is sustainable. If it's increasing beyond that of inflation, it's a bubble and people simply just aren't going to be able to afford it. People on the upswing of any market become complacent that prices will always continue to rise, but this isn't necessarily true. The future is yet to be determined, and who knows what will happen.

I have known landlords who have had their properties vacant for several months at a time. Their mortgages continued though and this put a lot of pressure on them financially. There's also the issue of tenants that end up not paying, or paying late, etc.

You're not wrong and your strategy has a strong superficial appeal: property ownership with flexibility! Properties can be rented out, it's possible to find great long-term tenants, and it's even possible to break even or make a slight profit as an amateur landlord. Your strategy can be made to work, it's just the costs probably aren't worth it unless you're a landlord with a good number of properties. I'd argue the actual flexibility is marginal compared to renting; if I want to leave my rented property, I can do so quite easily and with minimal moving costs. I do appreciate the cost of this flexibility too though: I'm paying someone else's mortgage with nothing to show for it in the long term. Also, owning has the distinct advantage of control: nobody's going to be a more accommodating landlord to me than me!

[0] This assumes that the property is a second-hand dwelling, not one bought from a new developer, or been renovated, or any of the other exceptions that come to mind.

<comment><USER18> Have to admit that I find this perspective on property baffling as an Australian. People here in SA act like its the end of the world if the market appears to flatten or a property takes a few weeks to sell. Not denying that a bubble could exist, but there are always tenants here and land is consistently in demand. The stories of doom are generally anchored to a glut in apartment development and/or Eastern states. Property with land is not so susceptible with ever-rising demand (immigration, investment properties, etc); e.g., my place is 750sqm, I demolished an older house and built new; within two years of buying, the land value alone was $100k up on the original purchase price.

<comment><USER19> In the UK, from the time a property is listed with an estate agent to the time conveyancing is completed can be on the order of several months, if not vastly more. It's not fast, especially because the buyer's and seller's lawyers doing the conveyancing take their sweet time to talk to each other, the surveys take time, and dealing with the local council and land registry, etc isn't immediate. Also, buyers in a property chain can cause problems if one of the deals in that chain falls through and they don't recover. It's hard work buying or selling somewhere in the UK. It's not a happy process!

The reason I think there's still a bubble is that housing costs are increasing faster than wages. More and more of peoples' budgets are being spent on just protecting themselves from the rain and scorpions, and at some point this cost just becomes untenable and a correction, or worse a crash will occur as the market can no longer bear such prices.

I'm very skeptical when I hear someone articulate that prices must always go up in the long term because they have in the past. They might continue to rise for a while, but eventually ... pop goes the bubble!

<comment><USER18> Future stock of tenants (people who can't afford to buy) requires home owners to rent to them. In fact, housing affordability can be problematic here because investors are usually in a stronger position to buy a property to rent it, outbidding someone wanting to live there. You might be aware of negative gearing, too.

Just curious, were your parents an influence in how you view property? I imagine here that many 18-30s whose parents bought property would be more likely to buy for themselves.

Thinking about it, the only friends I can think of immediately who doesn't own their own house here (out of say 20-30 people) are still studying or recently finished. And both would be planning to buy within 2-3 years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The author has some good points, but the most important thing to keep in mind is that in a free society, anyone else can come along and do what you're doing and do it cheaper (which is apparently what has happened after Ferriss et al. widely publicized various passive income approaches).

I do like setting "passive income generation" as a goal, but only as a useful thought experiment. It helps to think about "what would have to be true for me to remove myself from this business indefintely?"

That's great as a thought experiment; it can facilitate some creative brainstorming, but it's not so wise as a business strategy.

</comment><comment><USER21> The formulation of passive income the author talks about is specifically addressed to the crowd that wants(or is being instructed by "self-help gurus") to turn around a product of minimal or transient value. Although that sector makes an undeserved amount of noise, it's not representative of all the possible ways in which one could make a low-maintenance product, and the reasons for doing so.

</comment><comment><USER22> Looks like a lot of young people are taking page directly from from Time Ferris's book Four Hour Work Week. A LOT of people I know have a singular goal in their life: Make X million dollars in shortest possible time and then live off of that for rest of the life. It would be astonishing how much of the activities are generated in software world from this goal compared to other areas of engineering and art. The net effect is large number of short lived and/or crappy products that is designed for nothing but cashing out as quickly as possible. Founders creating companies not to create a long term value or advance humanity or state of the art or make people's lives better but find people with money who can be talked in to to shell away some money with promises of future. Someone had stated before that best minds of our generation are busy increasing ad revenue by 1%. I think things are more worse than that. Best minds of our generation are busy plotting shortest possible path to retire at youngest possible age.

</comment><comment><USER23> As someone wiser than me once said, true wealth is how long you can maintain your _preferred_ lifestyle without working.

By that definition, I've only met a handful of people who are wealthy.

Some people who I've thought are relatively wealthy have alimony, child- support, large mortgages on 2nd homes in nice coastal areas.

Even consultants I've met who have charged $10k/day (healthcare), they can't sit around and play golf - they go nuts.

The best passive income is selling something that improves people's lives in a small way (whether it be an entertaining iPhone game that connects friends for a game or a healthy meal planner that brings a family together for dinner).

<comment><USER24> Interesting, but I'm not sure how much sense it makes to redefine wealth as a length of time. If your goal is to sustain a lifestyle without working, I can certainly see the appeal of that, but to me the standard definition of wealth is fine -- something along the lines of abundance of resources.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Call it 'rent seeking' and there is not a lot of danger or fantasy to it:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent- seeking)

</comment><comment><USER26> The author seems to be aiming this article at people who decide to spend their time on something that can generate passive income _because_ it generates passive income. And I agree with that sentiment. That being said, if you enjoy doing something that can generate passive income, the by all means go for it.

The author almost gets there by saying, >Of course, you can make honest money in Internet info-products, or affiliate marketing, or other such areas where people tend to get drawn to "passive income" fantasies. But, to make real money over the sustainable long-haul, you must treat these like any other business.

If this were true, then no one is able to generate such income. Not sure if I agree with that then. Interesting read though.

</comment><comment><USER27> Re: #3 Isn't the whole point of passive income that you don't need a team?

Re: #4 Can't you use the money you get from whatever you're doing passively to spend on something you support passionately?

<comment><USER28> Yeah I saw #3 and realized the author has no idea what the goal of passive in come is. It's completely the opposite of "scaling" and "growing a team".

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> What's interesting is that he's done some stuff with Tim Ferris, who he sees as a mentor and helped him a ton with his book launch, so you think he would have read Tim Ferris' 4-Hour Work Week to counter all his arguments. He's got really good Forbes articles to be honest, but his Education of Millionaires book was not that good at all and I can't recommend it.

<comment><USER30> I read the first few chapters of the 4-Hour work week, it's written like one of those cheesy, scummy, get rich quick commercials. Is the rest of the book worthwhile? I got sick after about 50 pages of the author describing how awesome he is at literally every single endeavor that humans can participate in.

There have been maybe five times in my entire life that I've failed to finish reading a book that I've started, this was one of them, and it was by far the easiest to put down.

<comment><USER31> IIRC, there's only one chapter listing all of Ferriss's accomplishments and it was only a few pages. I thought the book had a lot of great information and case studies. Honestly though, the biggest takeaway is "get lucky starting a business and make a bunch of money and then you can justify anything that follows." Easy to travel when you've made a bunch of money, easy to hire assistants when you've made a bunch of money, etc. Of course, there are case studies that are specifically chosen to show people with fewer means doing the same things.

I will say though that, from the title to the terminology, the book definitely has its cheesy, "get rich quick" moments. Why? Probably because that was the best way to sell it. It wasn't initially called "The 4 Hour Workweek," but Ferriss tested titles and found that one got the most reaction.

<comment><USER30> Maybe I'm not a good representative of his target audience, but to me, sounding like an infomercial con-artist isn't a good way to sell a product unless it has no value and you are merely attempting to take advantage of people. That may not be the case, but that's how I interpret that method of promotion.

It's been a while since I read it, perhaps I did exaggerate the page count of his self-promotion, but I remember finding it extremely off-putting.

<comment><USER32> I think patio11 was the one who said that a lot of successful things sound scummy like that...because that works really, really well, outside of the specific demographic that inhabits HN.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> The first time I ran into this idea in a somewhat 'formal' message was in Tim Ferris' "4 Hour Workweek".

Was it this book that brought the idea of passive income (especially using the leverage of outsourcing) to the masses, or was there some other mass media fad generator before this book?

<comment><USER34> Passive income was definitely a thing before Ferriss. I actually admire Ferriss because what he describes is building the simplest thing that actually delivers a valuable product to a customer, whereas most others who I've seen try to explain "passive income" for the masses just recommend writing ebooks. People have been googling about "how to make money online" as long as Google has been a thing, and after researching for a while you are likely to end up finding advice about creating "information products". This is because, for most people, writing and selling an overpriced niche ebook online is one of the few borderline legitimate ways they can make better-than-McJob money if they do a good job on market research and actually possess some knowledge that's valuable to others.

There was an epidemic of this among leaders of the "minimalist lifestyle" fad a while back: Leo Babauta, Tammy Strobel, Ev Bogue, and others. I'm sure it's cropped up in other niches too. That's where I learned about it.

I think the reason passive income gets a bad rap, in this forbes piece and others, is that most people don't possess the skills to create a passive income source that is not a scam. Paying $1/page for an ebook that doesn't deliver leaves a bad taste in peoples' mouths. But simple SaaS businesses can absolutely create real value to others without significant maintenance as many people in this thread have already described.

<comment><USER35> It's also worth noting that it's possible to write an ebook that _does_ deliver. I've bought quite a lot of ebooks in that category.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Company idea to anyone that wants one- a website that just sells fitted sheets.

I pick my bed size, and see a list of the various type of fitted sheets. Then I select a type and pick a color.

This might work as a dropship company.

I do not want to buy a sheet set. I don't use flat sheets.

When I look on Amazon, some bed sheets list "1500 thread count" in their title, but there are one star reviews explaining that it's microfiber, not cotton. At my local Bed Bath & Beyond, all the fitted sheets available are for Cal King beds, not King beds.

In fact, as of typing this post, "buyfitted.com" is still available!

</comment><comment><USER37> What makes it a fantasy is not that it is impossible. The fantasy is that it is quick (think 20 years not 20 months).

Oh, and you need to find and keep amazing managers which is a whole world of finesse unto itself.

I would like to point out that it is equally fantastical for the author to suggest that everyone just find a business area they can put their heart and soul into. Some people really enjoy the process of business itself, somewhat separated from the product or service.

</comment><comment><USER38> Why do I feel like there's a hint of Jealousy? Jealousy that others have found a way to make money with minimal work while the average person has to work their ass off for it. Like it undermines others' work ethic and that drives them to want passive income hackers to stop.

</comment><comment><USER39> Is retirement a dangerous fantasy?

<comment><USER40> Yes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Well, I saw absolutely controversial article and I have little (4 years) expirience in passive income, so I think advice "don'd even try" is worse than "it will not be easy, but try harder".

</comment><comment><USER42> I'm 18 and starting university in September, it is my intention to entirely fund my university education on passive income (I've been earning an increasing amount for almost 3 years with very little work).

</comment><comment><USER43> I find the quest for passive income comes from a laziness - it's like wanting an easy way out. Those folks rarely do well in the long term.

</comment><comment><USER44> ... says the blogger who makes money pennies at a time on page views from people wanting to read about passive income.

</comment><comment><USER45> one page (print dialog) [http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/06/24/the-t...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelellsberg/2011/06/24/the- top-4-reasons-why-passive-income-is-a-dangerous-fantasy/print/)

</comment><comment><USER46> the ironic thing is that the audience for this magazine consists largely in people who are making bales of money the entire time they're reading that article, most of it ``passive'' by the lights of the author.

</comment><comment><USER47> 6\. You have no reason to read Forbes...

</comment><comment><USER48> Technology is not fertile ground for truly passive income. It might be one of the best places to go for long-term _active_ income, and of course there are the outlier startup successes, but technology is all about change. I've seen enough people go from thinking they were rich on $30k per month to losing the golden faucet and not knowing what to do.

What most people want is more freedom-- so they don't sweat the prospect of losing this job or that client-- and that's an admirable and worthy thing to strive for, but not necessarily long-term passive income. This is just the wrong business for that. The idea that an iPhone app is going to be making the same money, with no improvements, 20 years out, is laughable.

What people are experiencing and calling "passive income" is actually a result of the fact that good engineers are so underpaid in comparison to their value that, by going alone and interacting with the market directly, they can often do better than they would under an employer and taking a 90% haircut (largely, to pay for all the less competent people) on the value they deliver.

</comment><comment><USER49> The problem I see with many of these "passive income" businesses is that they are not long-term. You might make money for a couple of months or even a year..and then it dries up and you have to start over.

It also don't know any business that is actually making money that is considered passive. You will have customer complaints, returns (or chargebacks), the market changes, If you are attempting any of the passive techniques you see on the various SEO forums, you may get banned by Google and have to start over.

<comment><USER50> That is exactly what "passive income" is in my experience - you spend several months working, then several years resting. Rinse and repeat.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Is it really so horrendous to consider that there are only so many people in the world? I've yet to see a place on earth where the majority of the people don't work for there living, so the probably of doing something that requires less effort than everyone else and having a better lively hood than them seems well unlikely. I mean houses just do not build themselves...the real path to success is finding a way to live the life you desire. I mean if you like sitting in fine restaurants ordering people around, then probably you should find a way to own your own restaurant, etc. Just my 2cents but all these schemes are just that schemes!

<comment><USER7> > so the probability of doing something that requires less effort than > everyone else _and_ having a better livelihood than them seems, well, > unlikely

Tell that to everyone who is wealthy enough to live off their investment portfolio (or just savings-interest, which is implicitly a very low-volatility investment portfolio provided by the bank.) Tell that to trust-fund kids. Tell that to artists and musicians and writers who make their money off royalties. And, meanwhile, also tell that to the population of some cities in the US where business revenue is supported entirely by disability cheques[1].

There are a lot of people in this world who don't "work for a living"; the middle-class seems to have a mental block associated with imagining how they got there.

[1] [http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/](http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/)

<comment><USER52> Not exactly a fair bundle; unlike investment bankers, musicians and artists create real value.

<comment><USER53> _Somebody_ must consider the work output of investment bankers to have some value, otherwise that money would never change hands.

You may personally consider their work to have no value for you, or think it is morally dubious, or whatever, but for anyone to be paid, his work must have value to _somebody_.

<comment><USER52> The reason I commented is that an artist living off royalties is (usually) reaping results of actual _work_ done, while putting cash into a fund + sitting and waiting, or being a trust-fund kid equals zero effort, so it's not fair to put these in the same basket. I agree investment/trading can amount to real value at the end of the chain, but these are worlds apart.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> The author doesn't seem to factor in the idea of creating passive (more or less) income from software development. At least ideally, a lot if not most of the software that is out there has the purpose of creating relative passivity (automation) with regards to some endeavour. The author's point that if you are creating (again, more or less) passive income you are most likely not creating value yourself is hogwash.</comment>


The Geeks Who Put a Stop to Pennsylvania's Partisan Gerrymandering - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/pennsylvania-partisan-gerrymandering-experts/ <comment><USER2> What about the possibility of "self-gerrymandering" at the national scale? By this I mean people's tendency to congregate with people who are politically likeminded. So for every liberal Democrat who moves to Oregon, their vote is now "waste" respecting the presidential election. And every conservative Republican who moves to Utah is likewise wasting their vote.

</comment><comment><USER3> Republican presidential candidate wins for the first time since 1988 in critical swing state. Time to redraw the districts!

Gerrymandering indeed.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Pennsylvania](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Pennsylvania)

<comment> shaki-dora \- Gerrymandering (and this lawsuit) have nothing to do with presidential elections: A state's Electoral College delegation is the result of a state- wide vote[0], and the number is based on the Census.

\- You've completely ignored the in-depth reporting of the article. Just consider the headline numbers: In the 2016 House election, Democratic candidates got 52% of the vote in PA, but only 5 of 18 seats (28%).

[0]: Only exception: Nebraska (edit: and Maine, see below (thx!))

<comment><USER4> Many more exceptions are forthcoming, thanks to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact[1]. If enough states agree, these states will cast all of their electoral college votes to the winner of the national popular vote.

[1]: [https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/](https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/)

<comment><USER5> > Many more exceptions are forthcoming, thanks to the National Popular Vote > Interstate Compact[1].

Maybe, though there is substantial reason to doubt that will meet the require threshold for activation. Still, those would make even per-state votes irrelevant, not make Congressional districts relevant.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: MicroMDM – Open Source MDM Server for Apple Devices - <AUTHOR> https://micromdm.io/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I'm the author(along with several other developers). MicroMDM is used in some enterprise environments and was recently mentioned in a number of security presentations regarding Apple's MDM and Device Enrollment Program services.

[https://duo.com/labs/research/mdm-me- maybe](https://duo.com/labs/research/mdm-me-maybe) [https://i.blackhat.com/us-18/Thu-August-9/us-18-Endahl-A- Dee...](https://i.blackhat.com/us-18/Thu-August-9/us-18-Endahl-A-Deep-Dive- Into-macOS-MDM-And-How-It-Can-Be-Compromised-wp.pdf)

<comment><USER2> Do you know if a small business can use DEP features?

Could per-app VPNs be used without DEP? If so, could they be used with MicroMDM, native iOS IPSEC client and an open-source VPN server, or is a 3rd- party VPN client like Cisco required for per-app VPN?

<comment><AUTHOR> Anyone can use DEP, just need a DUNS number to enroll into the program, and then to purchase devices from apple direct, or from an approved reseller. Unfortunately you cannot retroactively add devices that were already purchased.

DEP is not required for the VPN profile configs, that can be applied with just MDM (or even manually). The VPN payloads are documented here [https://developer.apple.com/enterprise/documentation/Configu...](https://developer.apple.com/enterprise/documentation/Configuration- Profile-Reference.pdf)

<comment><USER2> Are those the same profiles generated by Apple Configurator 2? I was able to get per-site Safari VPNs added by manually editing XML in the profile, but no success with per-application VPNs.

Commercial MDM providers only whitelist a handful of VPN client apps for per- app VPN profiles. Why are those needed when there is already a native iOS VPN client for IPSEC?

<comment><USER3> Funnily enough I have been trying to do that today - I don't think you can. You create the per app VPN with a UUID, but the only way to associate an app to a Per-App-VPN definition is through MDM - I think.

<comment><USER2> The next question would be whether it requires DEP, or could be done with open-source MicroMDM or the $20 macOS Server app.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This seems like the kind of thing Apple should be offering on their own already. But ultimately you're not going to see many enterprises adopt an Apple-only MDM unless they just love vendor lock-in to the most expensive vendor.

Negativity aside, I applaud the effort. The MDM space is messy and crowded with bloated products. I hope these guys can at the very least pop the bubble a bit.

<comment><USER5> Apple has absolutely no desire to go into the device management business. They make the devices, they don't provide IT departments with any in house tools, the entire macOS management ecosystem has risen from a need and it's a mish mash of different vendors / open source tools / approaches to skin the cat that is device management.

<comment><USER4> They already took a baby step in by acquiring TestFlight. It's a more dev/QA- centric product, but it overlaps with MDM. Google is already in the MDM space for Chrome devices. Apple has already been remarkably successful in the enterprise space despite seemingly never going after it. Vendors like Square are deploying thousands of iPads to retail spaces. I think there's a huge opportunity there.

<comment><USER6> TestFlight helped solve very real problems iOS developers had back in the day when it came to managing beta testing etc, and the acquisition was clearly developer tools focused for Apple. I don't think it's sensible to read too much MDM ambition (if any really) on Apple's part into that particular acquisition.

MDM is a very "enterprisey" market for Apple specifically, historically they've been more than happy to let others fight for the few dollars it typically brings in relative to their giant consumer/hardware businesses. Even Tim Cook has made the argument that letting businesses like IBM handle the enterprise cruft helps keep Apple's focus on just making great consumer products.

> [https://www.recode.net/2014/7/15/11628872/apple-and-ibm- > ceos...](https://www.recode.net/2014/7/15/11628872/apple-and-ibm-ceos-see- > companies-as-puzzle-pieces-that-fit-well)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm curious do any HN readers manage their personal devices through MDM with their own profiles, and what benefits are you seeing from that?

<comment><AUTHOR> The server is only meant for enterprise deployments. It would be pretty hard to do this on a personal level because you need to apply for an enterprise account with Apple, and request a very specific push certificate option.

<comment><USER5> Anyone can get a push certificate, it's not just businesses,

[https://identity.apple.com/pushcert/](https://identity.apple.com/pushcert/)

<comment><AUTHOR> MDM push notifications require to be signed by a special certificate, which is only available upon request.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> what other open source MDM software is out there that aren't Apple-only? Specifically I'd like to manage Android phones and maybe Linux laptops (but I doubt I'll find that)

<comment><USER4> I think you largely get what you pay for. Industry standard is either AirWatch or Soti.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Reading through Apple's MDM protocol documentation and coding up one yourself is a great learning exercise. I had an idea for a niche MDM product and coded up a proof of concept. Eventually I realized the idea wasn't profitable, but still got a lot of value out of the development exercise. I even rewrote it from Java into a couple of different languages (Kotlin, Swift, Go...) to learn a bit more. It's a sufficiently difficult service to implement that you learn quite a bit along the way, but not so difficult that you don't see any progress as you go.</comment>


Sublime Text 3 Dev Build 3127 is now out - <AUTHOR> https://www.sublimetext.com/3dev <comment><USER2> Sublime is one of the very few pieces of software I've ever paid for. While I'm traditionally a Vim user, Sublime is a great "paste stuff into for analysis" tool.

I am glad that the updates appear fairly regularly now!

</comment><comment><USER3> Loving the full HDPI support</comment>


Red Gate is sending a DBA to space - <AUTHOR> http://dbainspace.com

<comment><USER2> It's a suborbital flight. At first glance, I assumed Virgin Galactic, but actually looks like it will be an Armadillo spacecraft. Interesting...</comment>


Ask HN: Coffee table books - <AUTHOR> I was wondering what coffee table books people could recommend that would be relevant to the HN community? Aside from the obvious "Designed by Apple" <comment><USER2> I think any of the Edward Tufte books qualify, starting with _The Visual Display of Quantitative Information_:

[https://www.amazon.com/Visual-Display-Quantitative- Informati...](https://www.amazon.com/Visual-Display-Quantitative- Information/dp/0961392142)

</comment><comment><USER3> I consider the omplete Calvin & Hobbes collection to be the perfect coffee table book. Bust it out at a random moment and receive the sum of all human wisdom in bite sized cartoon form.

</comment><comment><USER4> Oka, Hideyuki. How to Wrap Five Eggs. 1975.

If you're a designer, this book might just make you lose your mind.

[1]: [https://books.google.com/books/about/How_to_Wrap_Five_Eggs.h...](https://books.google.com/books/about/How_to_Wrap_Five_Eggs.html?id=8rIBEm3ZVgsC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button)

</comment><comment><USER5> One I have (and use as a coffee table book) is "Core Memory: A Visual Survey of Vintage Computers". May be out of print though...

[https://www.amazon.com/Core-Memory-Visual-Vintage- Computers/...](https://www.amazon.com/Core-Memory-Visual-Vintage- Computers/dp/0811854426)

</comment><comment><USER6> The Art of Electronics, 3rd Edition, by Paul Horowitz

[https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-Paul- Horowitz/dp/0521...](https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-Paul- Horowitz/dp/0521809266)

</comment><comment><USER7> I use C.G. Jung's "The Red Book". It's imposingly large, very red, and full of impenetrable medieval-style German handwriting and disconcerting drawings documenting Jung's dreams and visions circa World War I. There is an English translation at the end, and if people ask, it's fair to pretend that I've read it because I do skim a few pages occasionally.

</comment><comment><USER8> The Making of Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey' by Taschen. This isn't a book so much to be read is it is to be /studied/.

</comment><comment><USER9> Atlas Obscura

[https://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Obscura-Explorers-Worlds- Wonder...](https://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Obscura-Explorers-Worlds- Wonders/dp/0761169083/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1506305278&sr=1-1)

</comment><comment><USER10> Information is beautiful. All kind of statistic visualised in a beautiful but still informative way.

[http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/books/](http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/books/)

</comment><comment><USER11> The Medium is the Massage by Marshall McLuhan.

[https://www.amazon.com/Medium-Massage-Marshall- McLuhan/dp/15...](https://www.amazon.com/Medium-Massage-Marshall- McLuhan/dp/1584230703)

He combines words and images in a style that inspired Wired magazine. The book is about the influence of technology on how and what humans communicate and think.

Your guests will be flipping the book upside-down and looking at the reversed image in a mirror at times. It's entertaining as well as informative!

<comment><USER12> While not bad (I have it) this is not Marshall Mcluhan's work. It is some other guy's. The text is ripped from Marshall Mcluhan's work of the same name which is a for more exploratory work and not fit for a 2017 coffee table.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I have this one sitting out and it's a joy to flip through:

Cosmic Communist Constructions Photographed

The beauty of Soviet brutalism: A photographic record of 90 weird and wonderful buildings from the last decades of the USSR

[https://www.amazon.com/Frederic-Chaubin-Communist- Constructi...](https://www.amazon.com/Frederic-Chaubin-Communist- Constructions-Photographed/dp/3836525194)

<comment><USER14> A couple on that theme:

Soviet Bus Stops [http://fuel-design.com/publishing/soviet-bus- stops/](http://fuel-design.com/publishing/soviet-bus-stops/)

Gas Tanks, Water Towers, Blas Furnaces or anything else by the Bechers

[https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/sep/03/bernd-a...](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/sep/03/bernd- and-hilla-becher-cataloguing-the-ominous-sculptural-forms-of-industrial- architecture)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> "Making the World Work Better: The Ideas That Shaped a Century and a Company" by IBM Press

[https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/Redbooks.nsf/ibmpressisbn/97801...](https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/Redbooks.nsf/ibmpressisbn/9780132755108?Open)

</comment><comment><USER16> Lego Architecture: The Visual Guide [https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lego- Architecture-Visual-Philip-Wil...](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lego-Architecture- Visual-Philip-Wilkinson/dp/1465422862)

</comment><comment><USER17> I really liked "Visual Complexity" by Manuel Lima:

[https://www.amazon.com/Visual-Complexity-Mapping-Patterns- In...](https://www.amazon.com/Visual-Complexity-Mapping-Patterns- Information/dp/1616892196/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_3?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1616892196&pd_rd_r=V2X13HZE7YG7QJGVMY5K&pd_rd_w=ACtn1&pd_rd_wg=6wx4U&psc=1&refRID=V2X13HZE7YG7QJGVMY5K)

</comment><comment><USER18> Art of Atari [https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1524101036/](https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1524101036/)

</comment><comment><USER19> I think 'Revolution in the valley' could qualify, it's not really a coffee table book, but the stories are so short you can pick it up and read one in a few minutes.

There is also 'Appledesign: The Work of the Apple Industrial Design Group', it's old and out of print but it's got some really interesting prototypes in there.

As others have mentioned there is also Dieter Rams book and Core Memory.

Might I also suggest Knuth?

</comment><comment><USER20> My favourite is by the illustrator Mr Bingo - it is called Hate Mail, and it features illustrations and hand-drawn typography on real postcards that were sent to real people - features lots of swearing NSFW

[https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hate-Mail-DEFINITIVE-COLLECTION- Bin...](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hate-Mail-DEFINITIVE-COLLECTION- Bingo/dp/1910931462)

</comment><comment><USER21> I just picked up "Reading the Past: Ancient Writing from Cuneiform to the Alphabet". It's actually a combination of 6 smaller "books" that goes over:

\- Cuneiform \- Egyptian Hieroglyhps \- Linear B \- The Early Alphabet \- Green Inscriptions \- Etruscan

Much of what's in the book are things I've already learned. However, it makes for a great summary for people that are over and have questions.

</comment><comment><USER22> Off topic, but you should get this if you see it for cheap.

[https://www.amazon.com/City-Darkness-Life-Kowloon- Walled/dp/...](https://www.amazon.com/City-Darkness-Life-Kowloon- Walled/dp/1873200137/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1506300012&sr=8-2&keywords=city+of+darkness)

It's amazing.

</comment><comment><USER23> My room project: [http://myroomphotos.com/](http://myroomphotos.com/)

Tales from the Loop: [https://www.amazon.com/Tales-Loop-Simon- St%C3%A5lenhag/dp/16...](https://www.amazon.com/Tales-Loop-Simon- St%C3%A5lenhag/dp/1624650392)

</comment><comment><USER24> Books by/about landscape-photographer Edward Burtynsky [https://www.google.com/search?name=f&hl=en&q=burtynsky+book](https://www.google.com/search?name=f&hl=en&q=burtynsky+book)

Photos of landscapes overused by humanity, e.g. quarries, dried-up land, oil fields, etc

</comment><comment><USER25> I really need to get the online store for my three-foot wide graphic novel back up. It's about a robot lady with Philip K. Dick problems, and is generally the Kind Of Sci-Fi Fiction Nerds Like.

Trust me, you need a coffee table to read it.

[http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/](http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/)

</comment><comment><USER26> A Basquiat book by Taschen. Can't go wrong with Basquiat among liberal people

[https://www.taschen.com/pages/en/catalogue/art/all/49203/fac...](https://www.taschen.com/pages/en/catalogue/art/all/49203/facts.basquiat.htm)

</comment><comment><USER27> "Designing Interactions" by Bill Moggridge [https://www.amazon.com/Designing- Interactions-Press-Bill-Mog...](https://www.amazon.com/Designing-Interactions- Press-Bill-Moggridge/dp/0262134748)

He passed away in 2012. I wish someone wrote a worth revised edition.

</comment><comment><USER28> I really like Around the World: The Atlas for Today[1]. Fascinating content and great graphical presentation.

[1] [https://smile.amazon.com/Around-World-Atlas-Andrew- Losowsky/...](https://smile.amazon.com/Around-World-Atlas-Andrew- Losowsky/dp/3899554973)

</comment><comment><USER29> Cool Tools by Kevin Kelly - a must own if you're interested in making things.

[https://www.amazon.com/Cool-Tools-Possibilities-Kevin- Kelly/...](https://www.amazon.com/Cool-Tools-Possibilities-Kevin- Kelly/dp/1940689007)

</comment><comment><USER30> I like to leave copies of Mein Kampf lying next to copies of Das Kapital, just to keep my guests alert and on their toes. Also I've found it tends to lead to a general decrease in the amount of time it takes for someone to be labelled as Hitler during discussions.

<comment><USER31> Had a friend who put Ayn Rand next to Marx because he said the repulsion helped hold up his books on the shelf.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Not computer related, but I really enjoyed flipping through

The New Age of Ceramics, 2016

[https://www.amazon.com/New-Age-Ceramics-Hannah- Stouffer/dp/1...](https://www.amazon.com/New-Age-Ceramics-Hannah- Stouffer/dp/1584236248)

</comment><comment><USER33> Tales From The Loop

[https://www.amazon.com/Tales-Loop-Simon- St%C3%A5lenhag/dp/16...](https://www.amazon.com/Tales-Loop-Simon- St%C3%A5lenhag/dp/1624650392)

Received it as a gift from my brother-in-law.

</comment><comment><USER34> "accidents in north american mountaineering", a publication of the american alpine club.

<comment><USER35> or 50 classic/100 favorite climbs books

<comment><USER34> Freedom of the Hills is actually a great coffee table book. The material is somewhat dated for free-climbing, but it's a great book to read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Poorly Drawn Lines is a great set of comics to have on your coffee table. Check it out!

</comment><comment> the-dude Obligatory : Seinfelds episode about the 'Coffee table book about coffee tables'.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE5ROl2YPbs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE5ROl2YPbs)

This Ask HN must be a prank.

</comment><comment><USER37> Sled Driver

[https://www.amazon.com/Sled-Driver-Flying-Worlds- Fastest/dp/...](https://www.amazon.com/Sled-Driver-Flying-Worlds- Fastest/dp/0929823087)

</comment><comment><USER38> The Math Book

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6393242-the-math- book](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6393242-the-math-book)

</comment><comment><USER39> The Art of Engineering

[http://www.kirkhammotorsports.com/book_aoe/aoe_22.pdf](http://www.kirkhammotorsports.com/book_aoe/aoe_22.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER40> Principia Disordia.

But you didn't read that, and this fnord does not exist.

</comment><comment> semi-extrinsic I recently bought Haynes' SR71 Blackbird Owner's Workshop Manual. It's a great book about a great airplane, not just a fun title.

</comment><comment><USER41> How about a coffee table book about coffee tables?

<comment><USER42> This exists, and I have it on my coffee table.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> If not _super_ related to HN, Blink and Outliers are good options to both read and have laying around :P

</comment><comment><USER44> Thing Explainer by Randall Munroe is a book of blueprint-like diagrams drawn in xkcd style explaining complex systems simply. Its great fun!

</comment><comment><USER45> 'Gravitation' by Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler. It is still a tremendous resource for all of the science and math of Special and General Relativity.

A bit off topic, but I'd add the complete collections of Calvin & Hobbes, The Far Side, and Bloom County.

</comment><comment><USER46> Dieter Rams: As Little Design as Possible is quite a nice one.

</comment><comment><USER47> Core Memory: A Visual Survey of Vintage Computers

</comment><comment><USER48> I like "Lies my Teacher Told Me"

</comment><comment><USER49> _Watchmaking_ by George Daniels</comment>


Are You a Human at Google? - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/signalapp/status/1097920269484646401 <comment><USER2> Google's approach to customer service is completely appalling. Amazon is equally enormous and complex and I can talk any time I like with a human via chat on their website.

<comment><USER3> That's because to google, you aren't a customer, you are the product. Amazon treats you well because you are their paying customer. Google treats their customers ( the ad companies ) well.

<comment><USER4> Shouldn't perpetuate this myth, especially to excuse their behavior. Google took money from Play Store developers to publish apps, and they take payment in many other areas of their businesses too. That's exactly what a customer is in most modern economies.

You can actually see them paying lip service to some customer obligations, like the self-serve refund button on the Play Store when you buy apps because in modern economies it can be illegal to refuse all refunds as policy, and their fake support system would make that defacto policy.

Steam got fined $3 million for that just in Australia which represents a small percent of their users and modern economies, Valve were denying refunds globally for years and made drastic changes to their refund policy to avoid further liability.

[https://www.pcmag.com/news/350574/valve-fined-3m-in- australi...](https://www.pcmag.com/news/350574/valve-fined-3m-in-australia- over-steam-refunds)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> One if the Twitter updates alluded to it, but they can make a repository for F-Droid and have their users use that to get the latest updates

<comment><USER6> I'd really rather do that anyway than put up with Signal's self-updating nag- screen process.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> There's an entire genre of posts on HN which amount to someone telling a terrible customer support story about some FAANG-y company, with the result (and likely intention) that the attention forces the FAANG to turn around, generously fix the problem, and offer the author profuse apologies and freebies to show how nice they are.

Not only is it sad that the same thing is now being done by a _well-known company_ , but what makes it even worse is that this post probably hasn't gotten enough attention to make Google care.

</comment><comment><USER8> Isn't this getting out of hand?

I mean, this should be a symbiotic relationship because these platforms grew thanks to the creator's content (apps, videos, etc) and creators grew thanks to the network effects of these platforms.

When it becomes unbalanced, shouldn't these platforms have the responsibility towards their content creators because they were given the tools to make their livelihood on it?

We all know it's a problem of scale, it would be extremely hard/expensive to have human customer support after a certain threshold - but maybe, just maybe, if that threshold is reached doesn't that mean that they're too big to give a proper support, therefore they're too big for a platform?

What's the benefit of a massive platform for users and creators if there's no proper support/control?

I just think regulators should look at this. Not to break them up (could be a solution), but to make them accountable for what they've created. Maybe AI will one day take care of it all, but currently it's not cutting it, and this trial and error approach to fine tune such systems is more damaging then anything else.

The pros of "oh it will be great in the future" do not weight more then the cons of the status quo.

Maybe I'm being unreasonable, I've witnessed waves of this, and came to my awareness upon the media outrage of brands ads being displayed in ISIS propaganda and stuff. It was quickly patched when it got to Google's pockets (though it still have flaws, yet media investment is pretty much assured now). What about the rest?

<comment><USER9> They get 30% if the revenue, how can they not be able to afford the support. The just don't give a faang

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The more Google behaves like this (slow, lumbering, unresponsive to devs, privacy issues etc), the more I start looking at alternative OS phones. Google Maps, Bing Maps, Uber, Insta etc. all have robust web apps these days, and unlike apps that silently grant themselves permissions upon install/update, a web app has to ask the user each time.

<comment><USER11> Storage is a factor too!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Unfortunately their humans are not much better either, where I've found that they have a "I don't give a sh*t" attitude. The best way I've found to get through to Google is to go directly to the person who is responsible for the product, in which case they will just log a ticket and hope for the best.

<comment><USER13> Too bad I have to agree with this one. Their process of manually checking is really very poor. Looking at Apple their process I never thought it was that hard, but I'm wrong. It is just very complex.

But as an indie dev that has 50% of all apps currently suspended for bogus reason, I'm frustrated, angry and looking for a more stable platform.

</comment></comment><comment> your-nanny This is the height of absurdity. Google get your shit together.</comment>


IWatch + iOS 8: Apple sets out to redefine mobile health, fitness tracking - <AUTHOR> http://9to5mac.com/2014/01/31/iwatch-ios-8-apple-sets-out-to-redefine-mobile-health-fitness-tracking/

<comment> k-mcgrady The introduction of the M7 last year seemed to be a step in this direction. It's also the only major use I can see for wearables such as watches. If there are planning to release a watch health monitoring would be the main selling point for me. I don't need a device on my wrist letting me know I have a new text message/email/notification. This would be a much better use of that technology.

<comment><USER2> You know, I thought the same thing until I got a Pebble to do some development on. Turns out, I really like getting notifications on my wrist. Lets me know if it's actually something I need to get my phone out for.

Also, it's easier to dismiss calls if I'm in a place where I can't/don't want to take a call.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> The question is, how far will Apple go down this path. Will they kill any developer with a health and fitness tracking app, or just provide the tools to make our apps better?

Until reading this article, I was excited for the possibilities of an iWatch for my apps. Now I'm a little bit scared of being crushed by Apple.</comment>


Space Station Espresso Cups: Strong Coffee Yields Stronger Science - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.nasa.gov/ISS_Science_Blog/2015/05/01/space-station-espresso-cups-strong-coffee-yields-stronger-science/

<comment><USER2> ISSpresso... I like it.

But seriously the explanations for the function of the cup in the article are amazing. I love the depth NASA always goes to in explaining the real world effects of a device or the lack of gravity in applying science. I'd miss the smell of the coffee I think.

<comment><USER3> I drink strong coffee, more for the smell then the taste...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _...all in little transparent 3D printed cups used by astronauts to drink on the space station..._

They apparently 3D print the cups, but I wonder if they are 3D printed in orbit or on the ground?

I wonder what kind of material is used, and the printing method!

<comment><USER5> The current ones have been printed on the ground, but there's nothing to stop the shapefiles being sent up and tweaked in orbit.

Mmm, tastes like the future.

<comment><USER6> First step towards Star-Trek's replicator. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> So can I buy a set - perhaps from Shapeways or Etsy or smewhere yet?</comment>


Some New GTLDs Will Fail as Businesses, Experts Say - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/257732/some_new_gtlds_will_fail_as_businesses_experts_say.html <comment><USER2> Have you seen the list? ([http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program- status/application-resu...](http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program- status/application-results/strings-1200utc-13jun12-en))

3 different companies were trying for .forum - what kind of return are they expecting? The cost of the TLD itself is $185,000...that's a lot of money to recoup on forums.</comment>


Ask HN: How to rescue trapped domain name? - <AUTHOR>

So when I first started hosting my site many years ago I used grokthis and I registered my domain name there too.  Now the domain name is expiring and I need to renew.
But grokthis is out of business and I don't get any responses to my emails!
I'm panicking, I only have 10 days until the domain expires.  Does anyone know what to do in this situation?  The name is utilitymill.com. <comment><AUTHOR> I noticed on whois that the registrar is listed as eNom, INC.

I found this one their help page: [http://supportcenter.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/24...](http://supportcenter.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/247)

Unfortunately I'm not listed on the contacts for the domain so I'm not sure if it will work. I went ahead and submitted a ticket anyway.

<comment><USER2> I was in a similar situation a couple years ago - I had to renew a domain whose registrar was eNom Canada and I wasn't listed as the site owner. I just explained the situation fully and offered to pay for the renewal myself and they eventually helped me out. They seemed pretty accommodating when renewals were involved, a transfer would probably require you to jump through more hoops. Good luck!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have no idea I'm afraid but I just want to say - your site is fantastic. I hope you get to keep your domain as I can see a number of uses for your site.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool thanks! Let me know if you have any questions or feedback.

(Though you may have to access it by the IP address soon .... :-(

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The whois shows this:

Eric Windisch (email@example.com) +1.2152691915

You can try giving him a ring directly

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point. I didn't try calling yet. I'll give that a try.

<comment><AUTHOR> Nope, phone number is dead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Even after its expired, i'm sure its held for another 3 months before anyone else can buy it.

<comment><USER6> It's held for three months, but only the first month is your window to rebuy; After that, the two months are an opportunity for the registrar to squat and charge you exorbitant fees.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I hope mine is not the best answer, but if you can't manage to prevent the expiry you at least need to be prepared for an attempt to 're-register' your domain.

When your domain does expire it will end up on a 'just expired' list and there are a bunch of bots auto-registering every expired domain that looks remotely interesting.

If it gets that far, at least make sure you're prepared to try and snatch it before the other bots get it.</comment>


'Hustle Is The Antidote' When Starting And Running A Business - <AUTHOR> http://techcocktail.com/hustle-is-the-antidote-startup-business-2010-11 <comment><USER2> Maybe it's just a coincidence, but all 4 positive comments were by accounts created in the last month and have little history. pg: if you're listening, were two or more posted from the same IP?

And frankly, they sound a little spammy. Who says things like:

 _Great talk by angel investor and entrepreneur Travis Kalanick!_

 _Travis is a great guy!_

<comment><USER3> Only my first post, but the "Great talk by angel invest and entrypreneur Travis Kalanick" came from a nick of the website too. Nice SEO attempt ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Travis has some amazing experiences to share from his time hustling as an entrepreneurs. It's great to learn from folks like Travis. This video is a great way to do it. Thank you Tech Cocktail!

</comment><comment><USER5> I also spoke at the conference, and its great to see Travis out speaking about his experiences. Lots of good stuff in there, even if Travis is clearly just getting his speaking legs under him.

</comment><comment><USER6> Great talk by angel investor and entrepreneur Travis Kalanick!

</comment><comment><USER7> Travis is a great guy!

</comment><comment><USER8> Loved this talk</comment>


Why Static Website Generators Are the Next Big Thing - <AUTHOR> http://www.smashingmagazine.com/ <comment><USER2> Try resubmitting this with the direct url: [http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2015/11/modern-static- websit...](http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2015/11/modern-static-website- generators-next-big-thing/)

This current submission just links to Smashing's front page.

<comment><USER3> I'm not the OP but want to see this discussed. I submitted here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10495876](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10495876)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Do most startups work 65 hours a week? - <AUTHOR> I'm not talking about feeling like a phony or being pressured into working over time for free, I'm talking about official hours that total 65 hours a week. These hours are not during 'crunch' time, these are ordinary hours.<p>Note: These are non-founder/co-founder hours. <comment><USER2> There are plenty of companies that try to get their employees to work those kind of hours. And, developers being as they are, there are certainly several who do in fact see that many hours/week.

But really, in order for it to happen, the developers need to allow themselves to be walked over. Sadly, "being walked over" is a common skill in your average dev, while "not being walked over" is rare. All it takes is one guy to stand up for the team though, and sanity will prevail.

I've been that guy on occasion. Developer Employee #1 at a newly funded startup, I sat in a meeting the first week where the CTO laid out a rough timeline and the CEO said something along the lines of "these are 60 hour weeks we're talking about, right?". Amazingly, the CTO didn't immediately say "of course not". So I did.

To my knowledge, no developer ever worked more than 40 hours in a single week while I was there.

</comment><comment><USER3> No, but that does not mean they won't try. I have worked jobs (back in 2008) where you worked from 8am to 9pm normally.

However usually those company's prefer the greener type of employee who is willing to take this kind of abuse. Get a Salaried position and they whip and beat you to get the work out of you.

President, CTO's can generally spend a lot of time working in order to keep everything going.

40 hour work week is the LAW in the US FYI; if they are asking you to work 65 hours a week and you are salaried. You are entitled to overtime pay.

Employers love it when employee's don't know the law; it allows them to get away with not paying them overtime when they are legally entitled.

<comment><USER4> Do salaried programmers/developers/software/engineers in the US get overtime pay? In Canada's province of Ontario there is a specific exception in labour law saying that these kind of salaried employees are exempt from overtime pay:

[http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/tools/srt/coverage_go...](http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/tools/srt/coverage_government_it.php)

[http://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/010285#BK17](http://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/010285#BK17)

(I haven't found definitive answers for other provinces.)

Edit: spelling

<comment><USER5> If they are an "Exempt" employee, then they don't get overtime. Exempt comes from the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

The US is way behind the curve when compared to other developed countries. I'd like to see the FSLA updated to the same level of protection as the EU Working Time Directive.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't think I've ever heard of a startup where anybody but the founders work 65 hours a week and those are not even official hours.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks-- just to clarify these are regular engineer/developer hours, I will make a note in the original post that these are not founder/co-founder hours.

<comment><USER7> Absolutely not then. I've never heard of 65 hrs a week either (for non founder/cofounder)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There are a couple of things about this.

Firstly yes it does happen, it happened at my startup and others that I know.

Secondly, it is an indicator of how inexperienced the team (and management) at the startup are.

Research has shown that knowledge workers spend typically less than 20 hours a week doing actual productive work, and beyond that it's ass in seat time (read Peopleware).

It is somewhat counter intuitive but often (not always) the way to launch (or whatever your goal) is to work less hours not more. My last gig (which required considerable programming skill) only needed me to spend 4-6 hours a day to get a prototype of a truly innovative product.

Most good senior developers don't do more than 40 hour weeks and most good managers + CTOs don't ask for it because they know it hinders, not helps.

Junior devs often do it because they don't know better and inexperienced management encourage it because they think more work hours == more work (flat out wrong).

Finally one of the reasons why this may be the case is it (a)is what startups to (b) looks good to investors.

</comment><comment><USER9> It doesn't matter what others do and how many hours they spend in the office. Only becasue some people do stupid things you don't have to follow them. If you are "just" an employee (eg. you are not working for the fuck-you-money) and still work 65 hours a week you are selling your soul for cheap and are high probably on the way to burn out. Maybe it's time for you to learn to say politely "no" and to get back to the 40 hours work week.

</comment><comment><USER10> There are some that exist - I know a company in the adtech space like that. But my experience has been very flexible.</comment>


The Amiga had a full port of Unix - <AUTHOR> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Amiga_Unix <comment><USER3> The A3000-UX was too little, too late. By the time it came out, m68k UNIX workstations had been left in the dust by RISC.

You could get a low-end SPARC for roughly the same price, and have 2x the CPU power. If m68k was enough power, you could get a used Sun-3 for half the price of an Amiga, and have 10x as much available software.

It couldn't compete with the low-end, either: you could get a i386 UNIX for under $500, and run on any hardware you chose. (SCO, BSD/OS, Interactive, Coherent, AT&T SVR4 all ran on PCs by this time.)

<comment><USER4> To contrast with the $500 i386 Unix: if you had a non-UX Amiga 3000 and wanted to get a copy of Amiga Unix for it, the price was $1,000. But this was for a version that would only allow two users to be logged in simultaneously. This included "users" like root, uucp, etc. If you wanted unlimited users, the cost was $1,200.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Er, yes....?

I confess I'm surprised this is regarded as enough of a revelation to reach the front page. A relatively popular piece of hardware had an uncommon but far from unheard of variation. It's a few years before my time in the scene but I suspect it would have been advertised at least occasionally...

Let's see, other bits of tech trivia:

* Amiga ports of Linux and NetBSD also existed (somewhat later) and had reasonable market traction. BSD's Matt Dillon produced an Amiga C compiler called 'DICE'.

* Microsoft had a version of Unix called Xenix which they ran internally for many years (apparently into the early 90s). Can't find it just now but I've heard before that early versions of Windows may have been developed on Xenix machines and cross-compiled.

* Linus Torvalds' learnt computer programming on the rather obscure Sinclair QL.

* Tux wasn't really chosen as the 'Linux logo'. There was a competition to mark the release of 2.0 and it didn't win, but Linus mentioned he liked Penguins and Tux got taken up in place of the rather dull chosen entries.

Go on people, see what else you can come up with :-)

<comment><USER6> Xenix was not just internal, they also sold it.

<comment><USER5> Sorry, yes, I didn't mean to imply that. It became SCO Unix in the end.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> So? With a 32 bit CPU and the capability to have more than a megabyte of memory, the Amiga was obviously capable of running Unix.

More interesting are the cheap 8 bit computers that could run Unix-likes. For instance, the 64K TRS-80 Color Computer could run OS-9, which is still in use today as an "embedded Unix".

<comment><USER8> OS-9 is and never was an "embedded Unix". It has a genealogy independent from any of the Unices. It was originally developed in assembly, as an OS on which to run BASIC09 on a Motorola 6809. BASIC09 is interesting in itself: it compiled to an intermediate byte-code, which made it very fast compared to other interpreters.

OS-9 did, however, have something called a "unix emulation shell" - <USER2> basically means an sh clone with some unix compatibility libraries to back it. Sort of like the posix libraries for Windows.

<comment><USER7> Linux has a genealogy independent from Unix, too. Only pedants would argue that it isn't a Unix. Sure, OS-9 has more differences from Unix than Linux does, but it's obvious that it was designed to be Unix-like. You're not going to get POSIX-compatibility in 64K of RAM, but OS-9 did a pretty good job.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I miss the time when you could buy a computer that was actually different from an IBM PC...

<comment><USER10> Just buy a phone.

<comment><USER9> You know it's not the same. You don't hook up your phone to an external monitor and a full-sized keyboard and you don't run desktop software on it.

OTOH, a current phone could emulate an Amiga in real-time without much effort. I could, conceivably, run an Amiga desktop off any HDMI equipped phone with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse.

<comment><USER11> I've been playing with an Insignia Infocast -- basically a trivially rootable, ARM-based Chumby computer that costs 100 bones at Best Buy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I tried at one point to port some software to Amix, way back when it was released. Mostly the OS was OK, but there were some issues with the floating point handling that stopped the port from working properly.

</comment><comment><USER13> And Apple had A/UX long before OSX. Not great but it made a decent XTerminal.

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/A/UX>

<comment><USER14> And Microsoft had Xenix before that!

I've used the SCO Xenix port of MS Word - way before the Windows version.

<comment><USER13> My first *nix was Microsoft Xenix on a TRS-80 / Tandy 6000. I think we had 6 terminals attached to it.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80#Model_16.2C_Model_16B.2C...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80#Model_16.2C_Model_16B.2C_and_Tandy_6000)

<comment><USER14> I remember seeing about 5 or 6 users on a Compaq 286 running Xenix accessing an application built around Informix. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The Amiga had an m68k-series CPU, so Linux will run on it too, just as it will on old Macintoshes.

For more info, <http://www.linux-m68k.org/>

<comment><USER16> JFTR: Some people in Debian try to reactivate the m68k port. There is even a tarball with a basic Debian chroot available <http://people.debian.org/~tg/f/m68k/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The TRASH-80 had a full port of Unix -- Microsoft Xenix, for the 68k-based Model 16, 1982. The only other Unix workstation on the market at that time besides the Sun.

<comment><USER3> The model 16 series were not really workstations for a single user. They were explicitly intended for multi-user, multi-terminal applications. They had practically no graphics capability.

Apollo was arguably the first "Workstation" vendor, selling affordable 68000-based systems, before the 68010. (If I recall correctly, before the 68010, in order to handle a page fault, you had to set up a system with two 68000s. Only one would execute at a time. In the event of a page fault, one CPU would halt, and the other would begin executing.)

By 1982, with the advent of the much-friendlier 68010, there were a number of UNIX workstation vendors. The notable survivors of that era were Apollo, HP, SGI, and Sun, but there were others. Even AT&T had a line of UNIX workstations in the early 80s.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> don't forget <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Computer>

<comment><USER12> These were really neat machines. When I worked with them, the dominate language was Pascal and I think they were running a version of X Windows (or at least a similarly powerful windowing system). The funnest part was that we had these utilities that would allow you to do things like 'melt' another workstation's screen (this pixels would all start to drop to the bottom of the screen). It was hilarious. PCs in those days just had character based screens and Macs were still B&W. Amigas were the most interesting micro...</comment></comment>


OAuth and API Providers: Come on guys. - <AUTHOR> http://gist.io/3170829

<comment><USER2> Ever actually tried implementing an Oauth provider? It's surprisingly difficult to get 100% right.

I had a similar problem, so I started my own open OAuth provider implementation complete with built in documentation <https://github.com/schneems/opro>. If you're using Rails, you can have a working OAuth provider in production in under 5 minutes. Of course adding the API endpoints and writing application specific docs is still up to the user, but the authentication flow and logic are at least standardized.

<comment><USER3> I find with Devise and Omniauth it works like magic. rbates has some excellent Railscasts on the process as well.

I agree with the main thrust of the argument though. OAuth providers do not make it as easy as they should. The point about the buttons is spot on. I've had some good success with the buttons provided here:

<http://nicolasgallagher.com/lab/css3-social-signin-buttons/>

<comment><USER2> Omniauth is for implementing an OAuth client, and it's great... but, that's the other side of this coin.

There are very few good provider libraries out there, making it harder to stick to standards. People who want to provide an API shouldn't have to re- invent the wheel every time.

<comment><USER4> I have found that doorkeeper[0] is pretty good and the setup is a breeze.

[0]: <https://github.com/applicake/doorkeeper/>

<comment><USER2> I like doorkeeper as well. Opro doesn't currently support any other backends other than ActiveRecord, so if you're using mongo you would need to use doorkeeper.

I started writing opro before DK was out in the wild. There were some things I had in opro that weren't in DK so I decided to keep developing it.

Last time I checked here are some differences:

\- Deals with CSRF protected resources automatically

\- Works with your login system (like devise), not around it. No special casing or configuration is needed

\- Comes with built in docs.

\- Comes with built in test controller

You can play around with it here: <http://opro-demo.herokuapp.com/>.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Oauth, even oauth2, seems like a classic open, design-by-loose-committee failure. Too many options and open ended decisions.

My hope is that now that the basecamp2 API supports it, their implementation will become the reference standard.

<comment><USER6> I hope there's some standardization too. You'd think there would be some coalescing around the most popular OAuth2 implementation: Facebook's. But even they weren't big enough to get people to settle on one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'd add, that if you are implementing OAuth 1, you are making life painful for developers. If you are creating an API now, please use OAuth 2. It's much more straightforward for both server and client.

<comment><USER8> Which version of OAuth 2? It's not standardized, new drafts are issued regularly, many of them backwards-incompatible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand what the author means by this paragraph:

"Now when a user signs up websites try to make it as easiest as possible to increase user sign up and adoption. Then you provide an API that exposes this information and has data gaps because you wanted to avoid having the user type in one more field during sign up. The API should drive those requirements not the other way around."

Is the author saying that sites should focus on making life easy for API consumers at the expense of their users? If so, I couldn't disagree more.

</comment><comment><USER10> _"It is absolutely essential for each user to have UID that doesn't change and is consistent for the life of the account."_

I agree and that's actually been a problem with Twitter. They _do_ have a unique ID for each user. The problem resides in the fact that users can change their Twitter handles. So you can track a user with their UID, but you also have to check that their handle doesn't change over time and figure out if their user page on your site is at website.com/223453245/ (not the prettiest and people can't link the Twitter handle to the user page on your site), or website.com/handle/ (which is more desirable but creates problems when the handle changes).

</comment><comment><USER11> Making Oauth Providers seriously sucks. I kno people will out me for not being rigorous enough or not low-level enough, but I would really love if we could all band together and provide some reference, open source provider to build on top on.

In the Rails world, Doorkeeper is a great example: <https://github.com/applicake/doorkeeper/>. However, I wish Doorkeeper were ORM agnostic as i can not use ActiveRecord nor Mongo. I would appreciate any hidden gems that others might have

</comment><comment><USER12> Also: get an SSL certificate.

</comment><comment><USER13> This article is very vague and confusing. I'm sure there are real problems here, but the grammar makes this hard to read. What are you complaining about, specifically, in the "Logos" section? What would you like a company like Twitter to be providing in terms of graphics?

</comment><comment><USER14> We're working on a generic, spec-compliant, thorough implementation of the OAuth spec(s) for python. Quite a bit is working, and it has a very reasonable API. Help wanted!

<https://github.com/idan/oauthlib>

</comment><comment><USER15> My advice, somewhat harsh, but I believe true. If you build an OAuth endpoint, build an OAuth 1.0A endpoint. It's stable, powerful, and effective. There is no effective OAuth 2 "standard" yet.

</comment><comment><USER16> Hey there. If you have any good thoughts on improving oauth2 you should ping me:) I am posting a new spec in a week and since you know a lot of providers now we could work together.

</comment><comment><USER17> We at filepicker.io (<https://www.filepicker.io>) are trying to solve this pain point for developers working with user content

</comment><comment><USER18> I think Tim Bray just got into working on OAuth so that's exciting :)</comment>